conduct of the miscreant reprobates, are not the causes, but only the means of their perdition; for "all the "confessions of the reformed churches agree, that means as well as ends are predestinated." (Ely.)

Such, sir, is the candour, the consistency, and the undissembling truth of that system, which you erect as the test whereby to try the right and the wrong in other religious systems. No system indeed is without its difficulties. But when the difficulties in any system, exhaust every fair effort of ingenuity, when they require artifice, shuffling and evasion, to transform contradiction into consistency; and when after all, they still multiply, so that injustice and cruelty visibly mark their character, then surely such system should forever be abandoned; unless the last refuge of desponding errour should be deemed an apology sufficient, viz. To denominate each contradictory tenet an holy mystery, hidden from the ungenerate by his "crime of the want of natural power, to climb up into the pure and clear knowledge of them by the "reading of the scriptures." And surely no creed, denominated christian, can exhibit any tenet less consistent with truth and goodness, than that very pivot on which yours turns, viz. that Deity makes men wicked by an indirect influence, in order, for his own glory, to consign them over to eternal misery. And which implies therein "such an act of flagrant injustice, as "we could scarcely attribute to the worst of men. "He who leads another into an offence, that he may "have a fairer pretence to punish him for it, or brings "him into such circumstances, that he cannot avoid

own

"committing a capital offence, and then hangs him for "it, is surely the most execrable of mortals.* What "then should we make of the God of justice and mer.

cy, should we attribute to him a decree, the date of "which is lost in eternity, by which he determined to "cut off from the possibility of salvation, millions of "millions of unborn souls, and leave them under the

necessity of sinning, by hardening their hearts against "the influences of his own grace and spirit. What"ever may be pretended of such opinions, it must be "evident to all who are not deeply prejudiced, that "neither the justice nor the sovereignty of God can "be magnified by them." (Clarke.)

Your Critique will be noticed in my next.

SIR,

LETTER III.

YOUR "Critique" on a "discourse in favour of an indefinite atonement" deserves attention. Your animadversions on the ideas of atonement, against which you contend, bear more especially on two

* Just such an "execrable mortal" acting on the principle of first corrupting, and then destroying, was the barbarously brutal executioner, who, having seized on the maiden daughter of Sejanus, (prime minister to Tiberius) to put her to death for her father's crimes; and recollecting that according to the Roman laws, no virgin could be put to death; in order to render her a legal subject of punishment, first violated her chastity, and then led her to execution.

points; first, in respect to extent, and secondly, as to the precise nature. The heretical sermon extends the atonement to all mankind. Your orthodoxy limits it to a part of mankind. The sermon boldly denies that Christ "suffered the pains of hell" for any sinner. This you will not admit, though in doubt of Christ's having "suffered for sin, in his holy soul, after death." But you exhibit the "Great Reformer," as maintaining it. As I am unable to comprehend the precise nature of "Christ's descending into hell, fighting hand "in hand with the power of the devil, and, as it were, "wrestling hand in hand with the armies of hell." I therefore must leave these subjects to Calvin, and others who are able to comprehend such mysteries. But as the scriptures are much more explicit as to the extent of the benefit of the Redeemers death, than they are as to his invisible sufferings, I therefore shall endeavour to vindicate the evangelical benefits of his death as extending to all mankind, against your unscriptural limitations of it to a part only. But to prevent all mistake as to terms used, I have here to observe, that by "the evangelical benefits of Christ's death extending to all mankind," I do not mean actual, eternal salvation to all men, but, that through this medium, a real opportunity is afforded to every man to obtain this salvation, and which nothing can possibly prevent, but his own misconduct. The way being thus opened, I now proceed.

Upon the text, selected as a theme on atonement, you commence your critique; nor is your onset unsuccessful; as it must be conceded that 1 Timothy, iv, 10,

means not salvation through atonement, but preservation in this life under the ruling hand of divine providence. But you are not equally happy in your use of victory. In order to a second triumph, you concede, for arguments sake, that, in the above text, Christ and not the Father is called the saviour of all men, &c." and triumphantly observe, it “will not "thence "follow, "that he actually made satisfaction for the sins of all "men;" because, "if Jesus has procured a space for ઠંડ repentance, and the temporay forbearance of God, "for the non-elect, it does not of course follow, that "he made an atonement, to satisfy divine justice, and "mérit acceptance for every rebel." In these concessions you have entangled yourself in difficulties, perhaps greater than you were apprized of. For as by "non-elect" you mean reprobates consigned unconditionally, without help or hope to sinfulness and impenitence in time, and to endless torments in eternity, pray what consistency is there in granting unto such "a space for repentance!" Or how could such space be procured by Christ's death, when thereby he made no "atonement to satisfy divine justice for such rebels?" This bait on the hook you vindicate, by observing, that "if God may consistently command "men not elected to repent, he may men for whose "sins no price of redemption has been paid; and if "he is not willing that the reprobate should perish, "he has the same disposition, and is not willing in the "same sense, that the unredeemed shall perish." (Ely.) Desirous, sir, that your arguments shall be tried only by truth and candour, permit me to ask, what you

с

mean by the "men not elected?" Do you not by them mean the persons reprobated to sin and perdition from and to all eternity? And are not these the very men who are unredeemed? You cannot reply otherwise than in the affirmative. The men not elected are the reprobates, and these are the unredeemed, in your ideas of them: To all which I reply, if any such persons have any real existence, all that can be said concerning God's unwillingness that they should perish, and concerning any propriety to command them to repent and believe the gospel, is far worse than high sounding nonsense; it is a covering so thin, that even a small portion of discernment will perceive contradiction and deception to lurk beneath.

Elated with fancied triumphs, you learnedly comment on Heb. 11. 9, 10. "We see Jesus who was "made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering "of death, that by the grace of God he should taste "death for every man. For it became him in bring"ing many sons unto glory, to make the Captain of "their salvation perfect through sufferings." On this you observe, that "the original contains nothing an"swerable to man; and the eliptical expression should "undoubtedly be supplied by son. Christ was made "for a little while, lower than the angels, that he might "die for every son, about to be brought into glory."

Permit me, sir, to confront your criticism, which substitutes "every son" for "every man," with the high authority of Macknight on the same point, who, both in his literal translation and in his commentary, renders it "every one;" which, though different in